Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

Just got another Invision kit from Autobarn. It works well but doesn't last forever - my lenses were ok for about a year or so with the car virtually always garaged.

Autobarn also sell the Meguiars kit for a few more $$. Would be great to know if there's any real difference between that, Invision and Glassylite.

Also, if anyone knows of a longer lasting UV sealant let us know.

I just recently used the invision stuff on the top of my M35 stagea headlights and to me it made it worse but it worked great on my V35 sedan lights. Ohwell excuse for some mint headlights from nipon land.

Glassylite i think will be my next buy when it happens.

  • 1 month later...

post-76251-0-54013000-1390795174_thumb.jpg

Thought I'd add my own experiences with these 3 products.

In 3rd place the Turtle Kit from Supercheap. It was the cheapest out of the 3, I liked the fact it told you approximately how long to sand/polish for, but there was a pityful amount of headlight sealer.

In 2nd position the Invision Kit from Repco. I bought it on special but it usually costs about $55. The Yellow X chemical (wtf is in it?!?!!?) that you are only allowed to leave on for about 10 seconds was amazing, it appeared to strip the yellow colour from the lens before my very eyes!!!! However i wasnt a fan of the 4 lots of wet and dry, partly because they'd chopped off the grit numbers off the back, but also because I prefered the sanding pads in both the Turtle and RainX Kit.

1st place goes to the RainX kit, middle off the pack for price, easy to follow instructions, plenty of sealer and polish. It has the same amount of lens lubricant as the Turtle Kit but you can just use water when it runs out.

Cheers

Simon

I used the Repco kit, comes with the UV sealant. Has everything you need, sandpaper, sanding block, masking tape, masking paper, cloth. The result speaks for itself. Was only $33 on special. Oh and it's not the Invision kit pictured in the post above, it's a repco self-branded one.

IMG-20140125-WA0003.jpg

IMG-20140125-WA0006.jpg

  • 2 weeks later...
  • 4 months later...
  On 28/01/2014 at 1:02 PM, Azumanga Davo said:

I used this one. Took me about an hour to do two cars in total and still plenty in the UV Protectant tin for another application to both.

2AQCAZ3.jpg

Hey mate, where did you get those Dupli-color restoration kits? I couldnt find them on ebay.

  • 6 months later...

I bought the meguiar kit, it did an okay job. I put alot of effort and care in to the restoration to try and get my moneys worth. In the end it was still a little frosted, but it looked to be from the inside. So far its been about 2 weeks, shall report when things start to degrade again.

  • 4 weeks later...

Seems like whichever kit is used the problem will return eventually. How about:

1 - Wet sand/polish

2 - spray with a clear coat

I don't see a downside with this?....Sure you would have to do a lot of masking but isn't it fairly permanent?

You would want to get a professional spraypainter to do it for you, most paint jobs I have done with a rattle can come out as a very slightly dimpled/uneven surface.. fine for a panel, but not what you want on a headlight.

I was over getting the hazy yellow headlights and re doing it every 6 months. In my experience the uv spray/sand kits will get cloudy again eventually and won't look good if you don't spray it in thin even coats

I used these guys:

http://www.uticolor.com.au/contact-nsw.html#Hills

Specifically the guy that does Blacktown

He did the usual sanding etc and then applied this sealant thing meant for paint. (He is a spray painter by trade) it's been over a year and the flakey or yellow stuff hasn't come back in the slightest.

He told me it would last and not one customer returned with the headlight yellowing and I was pretty skeptical.

I think it cost $60 a headlight or something along those lines and he was initially reluctant to come but as it was a small job but I pestered him. Nice guy, knows what he's doing.

I'm not exaggerate when I say it has not come back in the slightest. He's a magician.

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now


  • Similar Content

  • Latest Posts

    • Nah - but you won't find anything on dismantling the seats in any such thing anyway.
    • Could be. Could also be that they sit around broken more. To be fair, you almost never see one driving around. I see more R chassis GTRs than the Renault ones.
    • Yeah. Nah. This is why I said My bold for my double emphasis. We're not talking about cars tuned to the edge of det here. We're talking about normal cars. Flame propagation speed and the amount of energy required to ignite the fuel are not significant factors when running at 1500-4000 rpm, and medium to light loads, like nearly every car on the road (except twin cab utes which are driven at 6k and 100% load all the time). There is no shortage of ignition energy available in any petrol engine. If there was, we'd all be in deep shit. The calorific value, on a volume basis, is significantly different, between 98 and 91, and that turns up immediately in consumption numbers. You can see the signal easily if you control for the other variables well enough, and/or collect enough stats. As to not seeing any benefit - we had a couple of EF and EL Falcons in the company fleet back in the late 90s and early 2000s. The EEC IV ECU in those things was particularly good at adding in timing as soon as knock headroom improved, which typically came from putting in some 95 or 98. The responsiveness and power improved noticeably, and the fuel consumption dropped considerably, just from going to 95. Less delta from there to 98 - almost not noticeable, compared to the big differences seen between 91 and 95. Way back in the day, when supermarkets first started selling fuel from their own stations, I did thousands of km in FNQ in a small Toyota. I can't remember if it was a Starlet or an early Yaris. Anyway - the supermarket servos were bringing in cheap fuel from Indonesia, and the other servos were still using locally refined gear. The fuel consumption was typically at least 5%, often as much as 8% worse on the Indo shit, presumably because they had a lot more oxygenated component in the brew, and were probably barely meeting the octane spec. Around the same time or maybe a bit later (like 25 years ago), I could tell the difference between Shell 98 and BP 98, and typically preferred to only use Shell then because the Skyline ran so much better on it. Years later I found the realtionship between them had swapped, as a consequence of yet more refinery closures. So I've only used BP 98 since. Although, I must say that I could not fault the odd tank of United 98 that I've run. It's probably the same stuff. It is also very important to remember that these findings are often dependent on region. With most of the refineries in Oz now dead, there's less variability in local stuff, and he majority of our fuels are not even refined here any more anyway. It probably depends more on which SE Asian refinery is currently cheapest to operate.
    • You don't have an R34 service manual for the body do you? Have found plenty for the engine and drivetrain but nothing else
    • If they can dyno them, get them dyno'd, make sure they're not leaking, and if they look okay on the dyno and are performing relatively well, put them in the car.   If they're leaking oil etc, and you feel so inclined, open them up yourself and see what you can do to fix it. The main thing you're trying to do is replace the parts that perish, like seals. You're not attempting to change the valving. You might even be able to find somewhere that has the Tein parts/rebuild kit if you dig hard.
×
×
  • Create New...